Forum Adjustment Poll

[StevenL757]

All - thought I'd post this to stimulate some thinking about possibly asking to have two of this site's forums reorganized slightly.

Specifically, after chatting with the administrators, I'd like to start a poll that asks your opinions about renaming/reorganizing the following forums...

1.  Revise the Modern Mooney Discussion to read "This forum is for discussing Mooney models starting with the M20L up to today's newest models".  Presently, it includes "...starting with the M20J...".

2.  Revise the Vintage Mooney Discussion to read "This forum is for discussion specific to Mooneys built before the model "L" era".  Presently, it includes "pre-J" models. 

A few thoughts driving this:  In addition to having the new "U" and "V" models out, there appear to be more similarities between the "J", "K", and other models in the "Vintage" section than "L", "M", and later models....mainly body length.  It seems to make sense to start the "Modern" section's discussion criteria with "L" and later models.  I think both forums would benefit from the adjustments in model re-groupings; with the end-goal of both groups being more closely-aligned in discussion threads from all angles - operators, owners, maintenance, and enthusiasts' perspectives.

Regards, Steve

[201er]

I voted no. Either leave it be or go to three sections short, mid, and long. Not only are the lengths different but so are the eras for each. Also, folks, please don't post universal Mooney stuff to specific sections and specific model stuff to General. I often skip vintage for example but then am disappointed to find something interesting about all Mooneys hiding there or vice versa.

Edited February 17, 2017 by 201er

[StevenL757]

8 minutes ago, 201er said:

I voted no. Either leave it be or go to three sections short, mid, and long. Not only are the lengths different but so are the eras for each. Also, folks, please don't post universal Mooney stuff to specific sections and specific model stuff to General. I often skip vintage for example but then am disappointed to find something interesting about all Mooneys hiding there or vice versa.

Good points.  I'll make the adjustment in the poll.

[carusoam]

Vintage and modern can be a bit misleading as well...

Bob's E is post modern, as my O slides more retro as it maintains digitally driven analog displays.....

Best regard,

-a-

[201er]

4 minutes ago, StevenL757 said:

Good points.  I'll make the adjustment in the poll.

Thanks. That's what I vote for but I can't change my official vote now.

[thinwing]

No...and Nah

[mooniac15u]

Those 3 groupings don't make any more sense than what we have now. A 1967 F with a Johnson bar has more in common with the short bodies than it does with a 1998 J. 

[201er]

6 minutes ago, mooniac15u said:

Those 3 groupings don't make any more sense than what we have now. A 1967 F with a Johnson bar has more in common with the short bodies than it does with a 1998 J. 

Please! Just don't bring up what happens for a G model!

[takair]

There is also the Bravo section that is not grouped with the others.... I'm not convinced that more sections are better, in this case.  

Steven...is there some specific content that you are trying to extract?  Perhaps it is a section on power plants?  Is it Lycoming vs Continental?  Normally aspirated vs. turbo?  Handling qualities? The basic airframes seem to have more in common than not...similar gear...tail....wings...structure.  

[Andy95W]

I vote to either leave it the same as it is now, or create three groups:

Vintage: M20A-G

Classic: M20J-K-L

Modern: M20M-V

JMHO.

[Andy95W]

The problem I have with the short-medium-long body differentiation is that while a 1975 M20F is more like an M20J than anything else, a 1967 M20F with Johnson bar is more like my 1964 M20C than a 201.  And don't get me started on the M20G, which is technically a medium body but practically nothing like an M20J. 

[ArtVandelay]

I vote to either leave it the same as it is now, or create three groups:
Vintage: M20A-G
Classic: M20J-K-L
Modern: M20M-V
JMHO.

I think modern should be reserved for a truly modern plane, which Mooney hasn't certified yet.

[aviatoreb]

Wait - ...and I used to be young, and I am still trying to decide if I am old or middle aged?  Or young(er) than the other's at work.

How about consider the demographics.  Does old and new cut the forum community in about half?  Thinking about forum traffic.  Pre J and post J?

[cnoe]

My question is... "what would happen to the previous 100,000+ posts in the two existing forums?"

Is somebody going to sort them out or is the search engine going to provide new options?

Much of what's discussed here has already been said at some point in the past. 

[rbridges]

I guess it could be based on their differences.  Someone with a good background in mooneys would probably know the running changes pretty well and know where good arbitrary dividers in the timeline exist.  I realize that some models coexisted early on, but they could still be divided into separate forums.

[Danb]

Erik I've very recently changed my self to old or olden 

[ArtVandelay]

This just seems to me to be an attempt to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

Not yet maybe, but calling a plane built in 1977 modern?

[Bennett]

Erik I've very recently changed my self to old or olden 

What about us ancients - past 80 group.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andy95W]

35 minutes ago, Bennett said:

What about us ancients - past 80 group.
 

Bennett, we just refer to you as "The Golden Age of Aviation".

We'll figure out a new name when you get to 100.

[Browncbr1]

Any model introduced before 1980 I consider "vintage"  I never really understood why the J and K weren't included in the vintage forum to begin with.. 

[Hank]

45 minutes ago, Bennett said:

What about us ancients - past 80 group.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

One of my goals is to become a member in good standing of the UFOs. So you are inspiring, and a reminder that it's possible without going LSA.

[Bennett]

One of my goals is to become a member in good standing of the UFOs. So you are inspiring, and a reminder that it's possible without going LSA.

The UFO group is quite interesting. Many regional fly-ins, meetings, and seminars. Soon after I joined I caught up with a gentleman I hadn't seen since grammar school days. Both he and his wife are active pilots and commute between their homes in CA and Mexico. He is still working full time at his business.

 

If you don't do something really stupid, flying is good for your heath.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RobertGary1]

The vintage section never made sense to me, at least using the J as the divider. The F and J are identical airplanes other than some speed mods. Maybe the K would be a better divider as its the turbo variant but again almost the same airframe. 

 

-Robert

[RobertGary1]

I'd bet that 95% of the discussion in vintage applies to "modern" and versa visa. How about instead divide it by such as

Mooney Maintenance 

Mooney Flying

 

Personally the maintenance is all that is interesting to me. 

-Robert

[201er]

2 minutes ago, RobertGary1 said:

I'd bet that 95% of the discussion in vintage applies to "modern" and versa visa. How about instead divide it by such as

Mooney Maintenance 

Mooney Flying

 

Personally the maintenance is all that is interesting to me. 

-Robert

Well, some of the flying relates to vintage vs modern. For example gear retraction technique on manual vs electric, power settings in the pattern, etc. It does make sense to have vintage specific discussions, but it is on the poster to make their posts in general category when they are not specific to vintage/modern differences.